The Apocalypse (vi)

In the "Pulpit commentary" we have this commentary on the meaning of "Lord's day":

"The expression occurs here only in the New Testament, and beyond all reasonable doubt it means "on Sunday.""

This is indeed ironic. The reverse is actually true. It is "beyond all reasonable doubt" that "the Lord's day" does not mean Sunday, nor any other day of the week.

Let us look at the facts and then make our decision as to the correct interpretation.

The Facts or Evidence

1) There is no other place in the NT where we find the exact words "the Lord's day."
2) There is no place in the NT where either the seventh or the first day of the week is called "the Lord's day."
3) Many places in the NT speak of a "day of the Lord" such as these:

a. "The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord (Lord's day) come." (Acts 2:20 KJV)

b. "Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ." (I Cor. 1:8 KJV)

c. "To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." (I Cor. 5:5 KJV)

d. "As also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as ye also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus." (II Cor. 1:4 KJV)

e. "For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord  (Lord's day) so cometh as a thief in the night." (I Thess. 5:2 KJV)

f. "But the day of the Lord (Lord's day) will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up." (II Peter 3:10 KJV)

4) The Greek form of "the Lord's day" is different in Greek than "day of the Lord."
5) The context of the words "the Lord's day" shows no indication that a particular day of the week is intended.
6) The context has much to say about the second coming of Christ.

False Inferences From The Facts

1) Had John intended "the Lord's day" to mean "the day of the Lord" he would have used the same form as the passages where "day of the Lord" is used. Ergo, he did not mean "the day of the Lord" but something else. Ergo, the seventh or first day of the week.

2) John's use of the term "the Lord's day" presumes that his readers were familiar with the term, and from writings not long after this period we have early Christian writings where "the Lord's day" was used to signify "the first day of the week" or Sunday. Ergo, "the Lord's day" means Sunday.

Fair Inferences

1) If the words "the Lord's day" was understood by John's audience, this does not necessarily imply that his audience understood it to be a reference to Sunday (or Saturday).

2) It is much more probable that John's audience was familiar with "the day of the Lord" and saw "the Lord's day" as signifying the same thing

3) The unique adjectival form of "the Lord's day" was done for emphasis and is a valid way of translating the Hebrew words "day of the Lord."

Arguments

1) The fact that Christians in the second century were calling the first day of the week "the Lord's day" does not mean that it was used by them as such in the first century. To impose a second century meaning of a term upon the first century apostolic writings is not the way to properly interpret scripture.

2) No other writer in the NT refers to either Saturday or Sunday as "the Lord's day" and this makes it unlikely that John so uses it that way. The NT writers constantly call Sunday "the first day of the week." If John had meant that he was in a prophetic spirit on Sunday, he would have said "I came to be in spirit on the first day of the week."

3) There is no essential difference between saying "the Lord's day" and "the day of the Lord" and this weighs heavily in making them to mean the same thing.

4) To make "the Lord's day" to mean Sunday does not fit into the context, there being no other allusion to public worship by the church in the immediate context, but there are several references to the coming again of the Lord Jesus, which cannot be disconnected from "the day of the Lord Jesus."

5) To make "the Lord's day" to mean Sunday is grossly out of context and meaningless. What difference does it make for us to know that John began to see his visions on a particular day of the week? What other prophet ever began his report of visions by stating what day of the week it was?

On the Greek form of the words in Rev. 1:10, one writer wrote:

"Some people have raised a legitimate question about the above view. If John meant “the Day of the Lord,” why did he write “the Lord’s day”? In the Septuagint, the Hebrew יהוה יום) yom YHWH, “day of YHWH”) was rendered by the Greek expression ἡμέραν θυμοῦ κυρίου (“day of the Lord”), but John rearranges the words and uses a different form, τῇ κυριακῇ ἡμέρᾳ (“the Lord’s day”). Why does John translate “the Day of the Lord” in a slightly different way than the translators of the Septuagint did?

There is no difference in the meaning of the two expressions; there is only a difference in emphasis. “The wife of the President” and “the President’s wife” refer to the same person. If I use the first form, I am emphasizing whose wife she is (“the wife of THE PRESIDENT”). If I use the second form, I am emphasizing her role as a wife (“the President’s WIFE”). This same rule holds true in Greek. The Prophets who wrote about the Day of the Lord were emphasizing who the Day belongs to (THE LORD): John was emphasizing THE DAY more than the Lord to whom the day belongs." ("The Lord’s Day" by Daniel Botkin - see here)

That seems to me to be a more probable reason for John using a dative rather than a genitive to refer to the day of the Lord Jesus. But, more on this shortly.

In "The Translation of the Phrase “the Lord’s Day”," Richard C. Barcellos (see here), writes (emphasis mine):

"Note the translation of the particular phrase under consideration—“the Lord’s day.” It is not translated “the day of the Lord,” as in 2 Peter 3:10, because it is a different construction and uses a different word for “Lord.” Second Peter 3:10 reads, ἡμέρα κυρίου (hēmera kyriou [“the day of the Lord”]). The word κυρίου (kyriou [“of the Lord”]) is a genitive masculine singular noun. It comes from κύριος (kyrios), a noun meaning “Lord.” In the context of 2 Peter 3, “the day of the Lord” clearly refers to the eschatological day of the Lord, “the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning” (2 Pet. 3:12). Peter is clearly referring to the last day judgment, the day of the resurrection (see John 5:28-29 and 6:40).

Revelation 1:10, however, reads τῇ κυριακῇ ἡμέρᾳ (tē kyriakē hēmera [“the Lord’s day”]). The word κυριακῇ (kyriakē), translated “Lord’s,” is a dative feminine singular adjective, agreeing in case and gender with the noun it modifies (i.e., ἡμέρᾳ [hēmera; “day”]). It comes from κυριακός (kyriakos), an adjective meaning “belonging to the Lord.”[1] “Lord’s” is an adjective attributing a quality to the noun it modifies (i.e., “day”). The Lord’s Day, therefore, is a day belonging to Jesus Christ as Lord. The word κυριακῇ (kyriakē [“Lord’s]) is used twice in the New Testament—here in Revelation 1:10 and in 1 Corinthians 11:20."

Since the construction in the Greek of "the Lord's day" is the same as that in I Corinthians 11:20 in the words "the Lord's table," I offer these thoughts.

There is no essential difference in saying "table of the Lord" or "Lord's table." So, likewise, there is none in saying "day of the Lord" or "Lord's day." In either case, the adjectival construction is designed to affirm that both "table" and "day" are things that "belong unto the Lord." But, how is this true of Sunday alone?

"In" or "On"?

Many commentators and translators are convinced by religious tradition that the term "the Lord's day" refers to Sunday and reveal their bias by translating the Greek preposition "en" by the English word "on," whereas its usual translation when referring to a historical time is "in." The correct translation would be "I was in spirit in the Lord's day." To translate "en" (Greek preposition) as "in" leads one away from seeing the words "Lord's day" as being equivalent to "Sunday" and towards the view that "Lord's day" denotes "day of the Lord." John was not "on" the day of the Lord, but in it, beholding the scenes of the last day.

From ntgreek.net we have the following information on the preposition "en" in NT Greek

"In Greek, it is very important to learn what cases can be used with a given preposition, and to note what meaning is associated with the preposition for each case. Some prepositions consistently take only one case. Other prepositions may take two or three different cases, and have varying meanings depending on which case is used. You must associate the case and the meaning together when learning a preposition. For example, you should not be content to learn that ἐν means in. Rather you must learn that ἐν used with the dative case means in."

In our text, "in the Lord's day" is dative case. "En" should therefore be translated as "in" rather than as "on." The Greek preposition en is more usually rendered “in,” only once in Revelation is it translated “on,” in the expression “on the earth,” Rev. Rev. 5:13+. Everywhere else where en is followed by the word “day” it is rendered “in” (Rev. Rev. 2:13+. Rev. 9:6+. Rev. 10:7+. Rev. 11:6+. Rev. 18:8+).

Literally John is saying - "I came to be in spirit in the Lord's day" - ἐγενόμην ἐν πνεύματι ἐν τῇ κυριακῇ ἡμέρᾳ -(transliteration is - egenomen en pneumati en te kuriake hemera).

A contributor named Stephen in the comment section of an Internet article titled "2. The Origins of Pretribulationism" (see here) wrote some helpful things relative to a discussion of what is meant by "the Lord's day." He wrote (emphasis mine):

"John’s unique use in the New Testament (1:10) of the dative expression, in the Lord ’s Day (ἐν τῃ̂ κυριακῃ̂ ἡμέρᾳ), appears to be influenced by the repeated use of the similar dative expression in that day (ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῃ̂ ἡμέρᾳ) in the Septuagint (LXX), to designate the day of the Lord (Zech 12-14, etc.).

The context of Chapter One: (1:1) “revelation of Jesus Christ…”, (1:7) “Behold He is coming with the clouds…”, (1:8) “the One who is to come…”, point to Lord’s day as John’s choice of words to describe the eschatological day of the Lord.

To propose, as some do, that John would believe it necessary to reveal what day of the week he received the Revelation, and leave out the time frame for the events, is nothing short of unbelievable, and without precedent among God’s prophets.

Another way of stating this is that the prophets of God always gave the time frame surrounding the events of their prophecy, but never found it necessary to give us the day of the week they received the prophetic word from God.

It is noteworthy that, just as the coming of Christ is announced with a trumpet (1 Thess. 4:16; Matt.24:31), so is all that John reveals to us here (Rev. 1:10).

But all the writers of the New Testament who made any reference to Sunday, including Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul, designated Sunday exclusively with the phrase “first day of the week” (cf. Mt. 28:1, Mk. 16:2, 9; Lk. 24:1, John 20:1, 19; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16:2). The translation should read “in the Lord’s day” not “on the Lord’s day.”

Later in church history (as in our day) Christians would refer to Sunday, or the day set aside for worship, as “the Lord’s day.” However, “the day of the Lord,” “that day,” and “the day” are used throughout the Bible to designate the eschatological day of the Lord, the event when the Lord Jesus comes again.

John is saying that the Revelation he received pertained to the time concerning the events surrounding the coming of the Lord Jesus. The observation (Thomas, op. cit.) that John uses the dative of Lord (adjectival, “Lord’s day”) contributes nothing to his argument that the meaning is Sunday. The genitive is the customary case for adjectives; the dative for adverbs (Wallace, p.76). Peter, using the genitive as John uses the dative, writes (2 Peter 3:12), “God’s Day,” της του θεου ἡμέρας an adjectival use of God in the genitive with the noun day. This is especially noteworthy in that Peter uses this construction as a synonymous way of stating “the day of the Lord,” which he had referenced in the same passage (ἡμέρα κυρίου 2 Peter 3:10). Walvoord says, “The adjectival form can be explained on the ground that in the Old Testament there was no adjectival form for “Lord,” and therefore the noun had to be used” (p.42). Nothing from history, or from the way John uses the Greek language, compels us to conclude that by “Lord’s day,” he meant anything different than “day of the Lord.” Kittel observes, “A genitive του κυρίου might have been used instead of the adjective.” [Gerhard Kittel, Editor. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, 1976), p.1096] The attempts to import the later future meaning of this phrase, “Sunday,” into the present context is an example of the exegetical fallacy (Carson, p. 32) described as “semantic anachronism.”"